AMLO’s cautious foreign policy

If you judged solely from his campaign, you could reasonably expect Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO) to have a vocal foreign policy in clear counterpoint to the United States. He was, after all, the candidate who wrote a book entitled Oye Trump (Listen Up, Trump) outlining what was wrong with Donald Trump’s positions on Mexico and its citizens, including a comparison to Nazis. He was widelyexpected to take a tougher line against the Trump administration.

Thus far, however, AMLO’s foreign policy is cautious, quiet, and restrained. The unexpected shift, though, carries risks and will be difficult to maintain.

Mexico’s foreign policy has traditionally maintained its independence from the United States while avoiding direct confrontation. Since the PRI’s stranglehold on the presidency was broken in 2000, Mexican presidents have become more vocal, particularly with regard to the well-being on their citizens abroad. AMLO is walking that back.

Immigration is, of course. a pressing challenge for any Mexican or Central American head of state today. When the Trump administration pushed the “Remain in Mexico” (officially called Migration Protection Protocols) policy of requiring immigrants to wait in Mexico until their hearing, AMLO rolled over and did not complain. This is a risky approach. Border cities like Tijuana do not want migrants there long-term. Their presence creates tension at a time when Tijuana is facing its own problems with violence.

Far from antagonizing Trump, AMLO has shifted Mexico’s orientation from trying to manage the northward flow of Central Americans coming through Mexico toward finding ways to allow them to stay and work. Although Mexico’s unemployment rate is low, its informal employment is over 50 percent, which will limit the labor market’s capacity to absorb young foreign workers. As the number of migrants who stay increases, so will pressure to push back. AMLO applauded the agreement in principle for the U.S.to provide aid to Mexico and Central America for economic development, which could be a welcome development but in practice would not yield results for years. And whether or not the plan for a grand Marshall Plan for Central America will ever see the light of day is dubious.

With the Venezuelan crisis, he is a straddler, refusing to go along either with recognizing Juan Guaidó or imposing preconditions on negotiations. He favors dialogue and non-intervention, but he does not favor one government or the other, which is the essence of Mexico’s long-standing Estrada Doctrine. Yet he wants humanitarian aid to enter the country under the auspices of the United Nations, even though Nicolás Maduro insists there is no need for it. There is, in fact, no way to take a stand on humanitarian aid in Venezuela without favoring one side. As the crisis deepens, AMLO will likely find it tougher to maintain this delicate balance and will face criticism either from the U.S. government or his own leftist base. At some point, he may face the same dilemma with Nicaragua, which he hardly mentions at all.